One way to read the Frankfurt essay is as an objection to and improvement upon the kind of compatibilism that A.J. Ayer defends. In this paper: explain what the Principle of Alternate Possibilities is and how it is connected with Ayer’s version of compatibilism. Then, explain why Frankfurt believes that the Principle is false and so why Ayer’s version of compatibilism require refinement. In order to do this, you will need to present cases similar to Jones 3 and Jones 4. Come up with examples of your own rather than those I discuss in my lecture. Be sure to explain how your examples reveal the error that Frankfurt attributes to the Principle of Alternate Possibilities. Then, with the help of these examples, explain how and why Frankfurt would revise the Principle so that it captures what he takes to be the right account of why an agent is genuinely morally responsible for some of the things that he or she does. This paper is more complicated than the others you’ve written so far and should be about 900 words. It will be graded on a 50 point scale. You’ll need to start the paper with a clear introductory paragraph in which you lay out the organization of the paper, explaining what you’ll be presenting in the paper (use my instructions above as a kind of scaffolding for your introductory paragraph). This part of the paper is worth 10 points. The rest of the paper should then consist in your discussion of the three main prompts: what the Principle of Alternate Possibilities is and its connection with Ayer; why Frankfurt believes the principle is false; how and why Frankfurt would revise the principle. Each part will be worth a third of the remaining 40 points.